X Slide

ors Sonny Puzikas and Maxim Franz In one exchange the Spetz soldiers are explaining how their training is superior because they learn to move more effectively and shoot and fight from all ranges and angles The Green Beret proponent responds that if you need a back flipping hatchet attack then call the Spetsnaz His response to their fluid combat roll is to lower his barrel an inch to adjust his aim and shoot again You can watch the clip in question here This is a common critique and on the surface a valid one If someone was randomly rolling towards me and I was calmly standing still with my wits perfectly about me I woul

lower my barrel an inch as well and squeeze off 2 controlled shots and call it a day The difficulty is that to dismiss the Russian training approach so coyly is to miss the global point In my first DVD Primal Power I assert that if you can t move your own body effectivfely efficiently and gracefully in solo training on your own in ideal conditions then adding a resistant attacker on top of you raining down punches certainly is not going to suddenly make you better As I posted recently in previous blog entries stress does not improve your performance it erodes it The counter argument therefore would be who cares if I can move gracefully This is after all combat and not dance The difficulty with this tempting logic is that in dismissing grace we are dismissing efficiency and no one can argue against the value of maximizing efficiency Training must convert us into the most confident pilots of our own bodies that we can be In my years of teaching I have seen law enforcement officers who carry handcuffs as a part of their daily duties become completely inept when the tables are turned and they themselves are cuffed a very real possibility if you carry something into a conflict you must be prepared for it to be used against you I can recall numerous training seminars where the mat was filled with a sea of squiriming LEO s unable to get back onto their feet simply because their hands were cuffed to say nothing of their ability to handle the reverse threat of being pushed to the ground in the same situation Teaching the Coast Guard I saw the very real challenge of working in diving suits and life jackets bullet proof vest for officers large back packs and related gear for military You get the point The idea is not to volunteer for a needless roll in the midst of combat or to invest in fanciness for the sake of aesthetics The idea is to dissolve any notion of range or any distinction between standing and the ground As Martin Wheeler has said elsewhere there is one range and it is combat In a conventional situation with a conventionally trained individual marching forward arms stiffly forward in The Weaver Stance cup and saucer position the notion of changing levels and squating to one side while simultaneously shooting can feasibly be enough to evade and counter This can be easily tested and experienced with paintball or simunitions as many Systema practitioners have seen and yes it works against non believers While critics can easily dismiss this in isolation in reality the counter measure is no where close to as convenient or guaranteed The strategies work on paper and in application No Russian practitoner is claiming they are a guarantee only that they are a more sensible counter measure to invest in than standing still and squeezing or laying and spraying Many opponents base their critique on their own lack of physical capacity a valid one If you can t do something obviously you will not invest your training in this direction but to dismiss a tactic on the basis of personal inability is unsound You may not believe in fighting on the ground kicking or knife throwing you only need your attacker to believe in them and to be committed to cause you to have a bad day As Sonny Puzikas has said Chaos is the law of the universe Control is a dream of man To fight without control one must have faith In assessing the movement principles of the Russian martial arts particularly within a military context I am reluctant to call upon their widespread use as proof of their validity That something is done by many does not make it valid or logical Many illogical things have been used for centuries The merit lies in testable results Only through open mindedly assessing and training both methods under conditions of stress can the full value be perceived I have and I have no doubts I wish the same willingness to think outside of the box and to try something different to you all